A week of brickbats and bouquets for blueprint (EDP Commentary)


  1. Anon West Norfolk3 March 2012 at 17:54

    The Judge is spot on, the JCS is exactly like wading through treacle - it is just PR waffle. Everything will be absolutely lovely and it will all look like the drawings in the developers brochures. Not.

    I suppose all the planners all over the country are now trained to press a button and out will come this preformed treacle, "sprung fully-formed from the brow of Zeus" to quote the acerbic Judge again. In their closed-shop little competitions, all they need to do is distinguish between brands of treacle then - like wine tasters or tea tasters or something.

    Well done SNUB - it was worth it just to get those rapier-like remarks from the Judge, and thanks too to Dan Grimmer for being poised at the ready with his reporter’s pencil, as the comments won’t be in the Judgment. And they do kind of say it all, really. I must go and find the panto script I started, the Judge can be the Fairy Godmother.

  2. And how ridiculous does the RTPI look now. SNUB told them before their silly little competition that the JCS had been legally challenged and gave them the chance to withdraw it but they ignored SNUB. Any crdibility they had has been shot to pieces.

  3. I don't feel that the GNDP is a fit body to oversee the reworking of the JCS. Certainly the persons who forced through the deeply flawed and unlawful JCS even though they were pre-warned are not fit people to have anything more to do with it. They must resign or be removed from office otherwise they will stitch-up the public once again.

  4. I believe this article corrected portrays the judgement and shows why the Judge holds that appointment. The railing and protest from the Council only affirms their wrong doing. This is no longer about a group of residents who were castigated for their temerity to challenge the Council but the reckless disregard of the law by a public body in whom the public have placed their faith.
    That failure of trust is unredeemable and it is inconceivable that blame is not attributable as the Leader of the Council suggests. He knew the risk and took it, so should accept the responsibility for his malfeasance.